Now that folk memory of what that looks like is fading it's suddenly a good idea to have secessionist movements, new nation-states and the break up of stable nations.

I despair. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

Think you might be slightly mixing up your world wars there.

But even if you remembered history enough to understand it. The idea that Spain, which in the last century fought a bloody civil war, endured decades of a totalitarian dictatorship and a violent insurrection by the Basques and is made up of several national groups (Castilians, Catalans, Galicians, Basques) some continually pushing for further autonomy, constitutes a "stable nation" is pretty laughable tbh.

But even if you remembered history enough to understand it. The idea that Spain, which in the last century fought a bloody civil war, endured decades of a totalitarian dictatorship and a violent insurrection by the Basques and is made up of several national groups (Castilians, Catalans, Galicians, Basques) some continually pushing for further autonomy, constitutes a "stable nation" is pretty laughable tbh.

I think I have my world wars spot on there thanks.

The idea that Spain - which is over 500 years old - isn't a stable nation, is beyond parody. But then perhaps you don't think France, Germany, or Italy are stable countries either?

Cossetted political elites are playing with fire using identity politics. They think its a parlour game with no consequences and the world somehow owes rich European countries a living so any indulgence is fine.

The idea that Spain - which is over 500 years old - isn't a stable nation, is beyond parody. But then perhaps you don't think France, Germany, or Italy are stable countries either?

Cossetted political elites are playing with fire using identity politics. They think its a parlour game with no consequences and the world somehow owes rich European countries a living so any indulgence is fine.

Our children will end up paying for this crap.

Well there's really no point arguing then, is there. Your last 3 lines read like a parody of student politics. You're not Jim Murphy are you?

Now that folk memory of what that looks like is fading it's suddenly a good idea to have secessionist movements, new nation-states and the break up of stable nations.

I despair. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

We've spent 70 years trying to ensure that the reasons for fighting each other are replaced with reasons to support each other and grow together, none more important than the establishment of a common market and open borders allowing free movement and cultural exchange. It's such a shame that Britain's largest socialist party isn't willing to fight to keep us a part of it.

We've spent 70 years trying to ensure that the reasons for fighting each other are replaced with reasons to support each other and grow together, none more important than the establishment of a common market and open borders allowing free movement and cultural exchange. It's such a shame that Britain's largest socialist party isn't willing to fight to keep us a part of it.

I could not agree more. Corbyn's position as been completely disingenuous.

Mind you the Tories are in the same boat and the SNP were happy to take us out of it with Independence.

I could not agree more. Corbyn's position as been completely disingenuous.

Mind you the Tories are in the same boat and the SNP were happy to take us out of it with Independence.

In your opinion. In mine we'd be sitting back with popcorn watching the farce in Westminster unravel and safe in the knowledge that our little nation-state was not about to be dragged back 70 years by the bigger nation-state next door. So much for learning from the past.

We've spent 70 years trying to ensure that the reasons for fighting each other are replaced with reasons to support each other and grow together, none more important than the establishment of a common market and open borders allowing free movement and cultural exchange. It's such a shame that Britain's largest socialist party isn't willing to fight to keep us a part of it.

The common market was a good idea but we've seen what free movement and open borders have done and will very quickly get worse.

I can't see anything happening as the referendum has no legal status. But if they vote for it it should be allowed to happen but I don't see parallels with Scotland as we collectively rejected independence in a -------- legal referendum

It's not nonsense...'Support the 45' was literally created the day after.

It's clear to pretty much any observer that the Scottish referendum result was simply ignored by the nationalists the moment it was announced. It was clearly seen as 'losing a battle and not the war' and their actions and words since have proven that to be the case.

The same happened in Canada with their Neverendum and I reckon it would happen in Spain as well so I stick by my view that there is little for Spain to gain by validating a vote as even if the vote was No the Catalan separatists will just carry on regardless.

It was also pretty clear that "the moment it was announced" all the promises made in the "THE VOW" were quickly broken and all the threats of closing stores, company HQ's and manufacturing plants moving south were implimented regardless of the "No" vote. The referendum was a staged farce by the government and media from the outset. That being the case, we have every right to pursue a second ref. Alas, I am of the belief that there's no chance of independence. The Westminster government will never allow it - by fair means or foul.

It was also pretty clear that "the moment it was announced" all the promises made in the "THE VOW" were quickly broken and all the threats of closing stores, company HQ's and manufacturing plants moving south were implimented regardless of the "No" vote. The referendum was a staged farce by the government and media from the outset. That being the case, we have every right to pursue a second ref. Alas, I am of the belief that there's no chance of independence. The Westminster government will never allow it - by fair means or foul.

Not sure the Vow promised very much at all.

I honestly don't want to get into a protracted discussion on this but on the flip side I'm interested as to what long list of promises you think it contained?

You are also being completely revisionist if you believe the referendum was a 'staged farce'.

I agree on one thing though, I don't think the UK government will contemplate agreeing to another one for quite some time. Partly for the reasons I have put forward for Spain not wanting to agree to one and partly because they probably agree with Alex Salmond "In my view this is a once in a generation - perhaps even a once in a lifetime - opportunity." And with Nicola's "once in a generation ‘opportunity’ or ‘event’". Of course both have been rather revisionist on those statements as well

I honestly don't want to get into a protracted discussion on this but on the flip side I'm interested as to what long list of promises you think it contained?

You are also being completely revisionist if you believe the referendum was a 'staged farce'.

I agree on one thing though, I don't think the UK government will contemplate agreeing to another one for quite some time. Partly for the reasons I have put forward for Spain not wanting to agree to one and partly because they probably agree with Alex Salmond "In my view this is a once in a generation - perhaps even a once in a lifetime - opportunity." And with Nicola's "once in a generation ‘opportunity’ or ‘event’". Of course both have been rather revisionist on those statements as well

There was plenty of spin about "devo super max" but nothing specific.

Compared to Spain, the UK gov seems like a paragon of democratic virtue (albeit the media was almost 100% pro-Union). Indyref2 will come when it's popular enough to attract sustained support. Could be in a couple of years or 10 but it's coming.

I'm actually a bit more relaxed about the urgency since I think the UK is inexorably shifting towards at least a transitionally soft Brexit. Once that's in place and accepted, the harder Brexiters will find it a hard job to shift things their way. Like the supposedly temporary retention of the pound until the "5 tests" for Euro adoption were met. So I think Scotland stands a better chance of avoiding full on economic carnage until we get our act together.

You're probably right, if you don't accept that the present EU was born out of the deep desire 70 years ago to avoid another European conflagration then we'll have little to discuss.

The tone of your reply hits the standard Yes level. No wonder Yes and the Nats are bleeding support.

Eh? I'm pro-EU, it's you Unionists that want to rip us out into isolationism.

btw, latest poll this month, Survation Yes 46% (+3). Given the collapse of the oil price and the relentless Nat-bashing barrage from the media (and you on any random thread you can shoehorn your condescension into), that's pretty solid.

I honestly don't want to get into a protracted discussion on this but on the flip side I'm interested as to what long list of promises you think it contained?

You are also being completely revisionist if you believe the referendum was a 'staged farce'.

I agree on one thing though, I don't think the UK government will contemplate agreeing to another one for quite some time. Partly for the reasons I have put forward for Spain not wanting to agree to one and partly because they probably agree with Alex Salmond "In my view this is a once in a generation - perhaps even a once in a lifetime - opportunity." And with Nicola's "once in a generation ‘opportunity’ or ‘event’". Of course both have been rather revisionist on those statements as well

If I was viewing from your vantage point, I guess I wouldn't be as cynical. However, from this side of the hill, .......

La Liga giant Barcelona issued an official club communiqué saying it “condemns” any opposition to free speech.

in the wake of the events that have transpired in recent days and, especially, today, with regard to the current political situation in Catalonia, FC Barcelona, in remaining faithful to its historic commitment to the defense of the nation, to democracy, to freedom of speech, and to self-determination, condemns any act that may impede the free exercise of these rights.Therefore, FC Barcelona publicly expresses its support for all people, entities, and institutions that work to guarantee these rights.FC Barcelona, in holding the utmost respect for its diverse body of members, will continue to support the will of the majority of Catalan people, and will do so in a civil, peaceful, and exemplary way.

I honestly don't want to get into a protracted discussion on this but on the flip side I'm interested as to what long list of promises you think it contained?

You are also being completely revisionist if you believe the referendum was a 'staged farce'.

I agree on one thing though, I don't think the UK government will contemplate agreeing to another one for quite some time. Partly for the reasons I have put forward for Spain not wanting to agree to one and partly because they probably agree with Alex Salmond "In my view this is a once in a generation - perhaps even a once in a lifetime - opportunity." And with Nicola's "once in a generation ‘opportunity’ or ‘event’". Of course both have been rather revisionist on those statements as well

International law doesn't recognise "once in a generation", you accept the result, then move to the next one. Indyref2 here we come.

I'm either being slow (has been known on occasion ) or this response makes little sense...

Sorry for the muddy waters, RS.
It's a bit like the difference of opinion between myself and Livi's manager regarding Beaton's performance on Tuesday night. David Hopkin thought the ref favoured us - I thought the opposite.
Whatever side your on generally dictates the way you see things.

International law doesn't recognise "once in a generation", you accept the result, then move to the next one. Indyref2 here we come.

Never ceases to amaze me how Britnats are happy to brush off the promises made to the Scottish people days before the referendum as spin but consider the off the cuff statement made by Salmond as set in stone.

Sorry for the muddy waters, RS.
It's a bit like the difference of opinion between myself and Livi's manager regarding Beaton's performance on Tuesday night. David Hopkin thought the ref favoured us - I thought the opposite.
Whatever side your on generally dictates the way you see things.

I'm still not getting if you are saying that I'm suggesting it was a staged farce or you are saying it was a staged farce

First off I didn't say that and I don't believe that it was, second if you are saying that then I stand by the fact I think you are being rather revisionist if taking that view!

Never ceases to amaze me how Britnats are happy to brush off the promises made to the Scottish people days before the referendum as spin but consider the off the cuff statement made by Salmond as set in stone.

Is 'Britnat' the new 'Unionist'?

And as ever it is possible to view two things separately and without having to label someone who questions such things.

Both leaders of the SNP stated in televised interviews that it was a once in a generation type event...it's therefore fair to question their subsequent actions based on those comments.

The Vow contained very little in the way of 'promises' so it's also fair to question what promises people think were broken.

Asking the question shouldn't label someone immediately as a BritNat or whatever just because the question is aimed at Indy politicians or supporters. But I suppose that's why I decline to get involved in most of these discussions these days as it seems rather impossible to ask reasonable questions or seek reasonable answers without the labels coming straight out and the responses reverting back to the rhetoric that was being queried in the first place!

Compared to Spain, the UK gov seems like a paragon of democratic virtue (albeit the media was almost 100% pro-Union). Indyref2 will come when it's popular enough to attract sustained support. Could be in a couple of years or 10 but it's coming.

I'm actually a bit more relaxed about the urgency since I think the UK is inexorably shifting towards at least a transitionally soft Brexit. Once that's in place and accepted, the harder Brexiters will find it a hard job to shift things their way. Like the supposedly temporary retention of the pound until the "5 tests" for Euro adoption were met. So I think Scotland stands a better chance of avoiding full on economic carnage until we get our act together.

I tend to agree...most things never end up at the extreme ends as portrayed by the yea or nae sides of any debate.

I'm still not getting if you are saying that I'm suggesting it was a staged farce or you are saying it was a staged farce

First off I didn't say that and I don't believe that it was, second if you are saying that then I stand by the fact I think you are being rather revisionist if taking that view!

Anyhoo don't suppose it matters too much either way! ��

To clarify. I think the media bias, 'the Vow', company threats + some questionable incidents made the whole referendum a fiasco. You obviously don't see it that way & that's fair enough, I respect your opinion. Simples.

A 'revisionist'? I guess that's similar to folk calling someone a 'terrorist' or 'freedom-fighter'. i.e. It depends on one's view point.

I think the fact that Sturgeon said 'once in a lifetime' probably adds a bit of weight to the notion.

I think repeating this quote as if it's some sort of smoking gun that Nicola is nothing but a lying hound is unfair.

It's patently obvious to me (and I've never voted SNP to be clear) that the earthquake that is Brexit is a change that is so fundamental to Scotland, and such a challenge to democratic legitimacy, that a second referendum is justified.

But even if it wasn't, the phrase 'once in a lifetime opportunity' was used again and again by Sturgeon to describe the referendum as a phrase to tub thump, to drum up support, to engender enthusiasm. It does not mean 'I will commit to never ever having another referendum at any point in the future regardless of circumstance.'

Cameron made his Blomberg speech way back in 2013 in which he committed to having a brexit referendum, to placate the voters who were deserting them to UKIP. But even after this, most commentators were shocked when he called it in Feb 2016, and were equally shocked when the result happened. We all were! I think it's fair to say that no-one in the SNP hierarchy really believed Brexit would give them another shot at it.

I think the fact that Sturgeon said 'once in a lifetime' probably adds a bit of weight to the notion.

Horse manure. Expressing the opinion in a TV interview that an upcoming referendum is possibly a "once in a generation" opportunity and with the precedence of the previous one having taken place a generation before is hardly a pledge or "vow". It's simply not comparable with the leaders of all three major parties coming north of the border at the 11th hour with an empty promise designed to sway undecided voters that there is a third choice, even if it doesn't appear on the ballot paper. Comparing comments made based on personal opinion and a strategic lie is simply silly.